BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, MYSORE-570023

CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO.459/2018

DATED ON THIS THE 2^nd January, 2020

      Present:   1) Sri. C.V.Maragoor

B.Com., L.L.M., - PRESIDENT   

                     2) Sri. Devakumar.M.C.           

                                        B.E., LLB., PGDCLP   - MEMBER

Sri C.V.MARAGOOR,

President

1.       This complaint has filed by Smt.Mariyamma W/o Purada Rachaiah resident of Mysuru to direct the opposite party Bajaj Allianz Life Insurance Co.Ltd., Mysuru to pay Rs.15,000/- along with litigation cost of Rs.15,000/-.

2.        It is the case of complainant that she has taken life insurance policy bearing No.0127239747 on 21.05.2009 through Armugam, Agent.  The agent told that if she pays Rs.5,000/- per year for three years, she would get Rs.50,000/- after completion of five years.  That on 15.10.2018 the opposite party has sent cheque dated 06.10.2018 for Rs.4,861/-.  On enquiry the opposite party told that her policy has lapsed for non-payment of premium amount.  Hence, this complaint.

3.        The opposite party appeared through its learned counsel and filed written version contending that this Forum has no jurisdiction to try the complaint in the light of the order passed by the Hon’ble National Commission in Ramlal Agarwal Vs. Bajaj Allianz Life Insurance Co.Ltd., 2013 (2) CPR 389 (NC), where in it is held that “if the money of the complainant can be invested in share market for a speculative gain, the matter does not come under the purview of Consumer Protection Act”. The complainant has availed a unit linked policy for speculative gain, hence this complaint is not maintainable.  It is further case of opposite party that the complainant had availed policy for a sum of Rs.50,000/- and term of the policy for 10 years, but she has paid only three installments as such  the policy was lapsed consequently, the opposite party had issued a cheque in favour of her for a sum of Rs.4,861/- being the fore-closure amount.  There is no deficiency in service on the part of opposite party since the complainant has failed to comply with the terms and conditions of the policy.  On the amongst other reasons, the opposite party asked to dismiss the complaint.

4.       The complainant filed her affidavit in lieu of evidence and produced some documents in support of her case.  That one Srinath.N.V. Authorized representative of the opposite party filed affidavit in lieu of evidence and marked Exhibits R.1 to R.4.

5.         We have heard the oral arguments in addition to written brief submitted by both the parties and the points that would arise for determination are as under:- 

1. Whether the complainant proves that the act of opposite party not returning her entire premium amount amounts to deficiency in service?
2.  Is complainant entitled to the reliefs sought for?

6.    Our findings on the aforesaid points are as follows:

Point No.1 :- In the affirmative;

Point No.2 :- Partly in the affirmative as per final order for the following

:: R E A S O N S ::

7.         Point Nos.1 and 2:- The complainant has submitted that opposite party may be directed to return her entire premium amount of Rs.15,000/- without interest.  The learned counsel for the opposite party submitted that the policy of the complainant was lapsed for non-payment of remaining seven years premium amount as such opposite party has fore-closed the policy and issued cheque for Rs.4,861/-.  The complainant has produced regular premium receipt dated 21.05.2009 issued by the opposite party in which it is stated that issuance of policy under your application for Life Insurance Policy dated 21.05.2009.  The opposite party has not taken consent of the complainant to invest her premium amount in share market.  The opposite party has not produced any document taking signature of the complainant that she has agreed to invest her premium amount in share market.  Therefore, the decision relied by the opposite party Ramlal Agarwal Vs Bajaj Allianz Life Insurance Co.Ltd., 2013(2) CPR 389 (NC) is not applicable.  

8.          The opposite party has produced Exhibit R.1 proposal application submitted by the complainant.  Exhibit R.2 collection details i.e. three premiums paid by the complainant on 19.05.2009, 11.05.2010 and 04.05.2011 a sum of Rs.5,000/- each.  Exhibit R.3 is statement of account as on 07.01.2019 of the complainant.  According to Exhibit R.3, the opposite party has invested Rs.1,500/- of the first premium, Rs.4,850/- of second premium and Rs.4,850/- of third premium.  It has shown in Exhibit R.3 that on 04.10.2018 fore-closure withdrawal a sum of Rs.4,860.60 i.e. cheque issued to the complainant.  The opposite party has deducted Rs.7,325.59 towards total policy administration charge, Rs.2,757.87 total mortality charge and Rs.1,679.16 service tax charge.  The opposite party has deducted nearly Rs.8,000/- for policy administration charge.  The opposite party has used the amount of Rs.15,000/- for a period of 10 years without giving bonus or interest on the said amount, on the contrary it has deducted Rs.7,325.59 towards policy administration charge.  It is nothing but harassment to the poor policy holder. 

9.             The term of the policy of the complainant was 10 years, but she has paid only premium of three years.  Therefore, policy might be fore-closed by the opposite party.  The opposite party has not paid the surrender value immediately after three years, but it has issued cheque after expiry of nine years from the date of commencement of policy.  The opposite party would have calculated bonus on the amount of life insurance policy of the complainant or interest on the premium amount of Rs.15,000/- which was used by the opposite party for more than eight years.  The act of opposite party deducting huge amount towards administration charge of policy is nothing but unfair trade practice.  Therefore, the complainant is entitled for refund of the entire premium amount of Rs.15,000/-.

10.            The complainant has produced another cheque dated 15.05.2019 sent by the opposite party in her name for Rs.5,051/- after filing this complaint.  It shows the unfair trade practice of the opposite party since after approaching this Forum the opposite party has issued another cheque for Rs.5,051/- dated 15.05.2019.  The opposite party would have intimated the complainant that after expiry of 10 years period, they will make further payment of Rs.5,051/-. This shows the unfair trade practice on the part of opposite party.  The complainant has made submission that she does not want interest on the amount of Rs.15,000/-.  The complainant is entitled for litigation cost and mental agony a sum of Rs.15,000/-.  If both the cheques amount has been realized by the complainant a sum of Rs.9,112/- then the opposite party shall liable to pay balance amount of Rs.5,900/-. For the above reasons, we proceed to pass the following;          

:: ORDER ::

1. The complaint filed by Smt.Mariyamma is partly allowed directing the opposite party to pay a sum of Rs.20,900/- to the complainant within 45 days from the date of order.  Otherwise, it carries interest at the rate of 10% p.a. from the date of filing complaint till payment.  
2. Furnish the copy of order to the complainant and opposite party at free of cost.

(Dictated to the Stenographer transcribed, typed by her, corrected by us and then pronounced in open Forum on this the 2^nd January, 2020)

                                                  (C.V.MARAGOOR)    

                                                       PRESIDENT     

                                                (DEVAKUMAR.M.C.)

                                                       MEMBER